MTFCA Forum

At breakfast this morning I mentioned I was honing in the rods using Time saver but running into minor problems as I couldn’t get a full circle on the bearing as the crank was still in the block. I tried to rotate the crank but the rod bolts were awfully close to the oil line.
Jay had a solution. Using insulating pipe foam on the rod. This way the rod can mount in the natural position yet not hit the bores when rotating the crank. When do it next time I’m going to make the foam tube longer to assist in placing on the crank and help hold the bolts in place.

I would think you should have the pistons on the rods with no rings to keep the honing square.

I thought that I had posted the same thing that Jim said, but apparently it did not stick! I have never tried to fit the rod bearing without the piston on the rod, but I can see where it could be high on one side unless perfectly centered in the cylinder. The idea seems like a good one if it works, Perhaps if someone could find a foam piece the same size as the cylinder with a center small enough to fit the upper end of the rod, it would work.
Tony, please let us know the results after you have the pistons installed.
Norm

As a user an proponent of the product, I'd say that while the foam is very clever, everyone is overthinking this

Used to fit a .002" mismatch between rod and crank, you really can't get into trouble with this stuff unless you really work at it and I think a cursory look at a trig chart will show that.

If you're trying to remove .005" from the babbit, then you have the wrong rod in the first place. If you're rotating the crank 360 then you must be worried about fitting a bearing to an oval crank or are misunderstanding that as designed, the material will give a .0015 clearance and if your crank is 1/2 thou out of round, the rod will accommodate it in a split second of running if simply fitted by swinging the rod back/forth under the engine.

I don't think either of these issues is going on in the original posting, but I do think that excessive caution where not warranted IS going on. As an aside, I think this is the very first time I've ever heard of a rod being fitted on a crank turned 360. Bare crank in mains, yes; rods, no.

Timesaver’s most appropriate use is a new rod on a crank that hasn’t been machined. Say, the oil line plugged and you starved the #1 rod and you want to replace it in the car. After clearing the tube, times saver can be used on the new rod. With a ground crank and a properly babbited rod it shouldn’t be necessary.

Andy

AndyClary wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 31, 2021 11:10 pm

Timesaver’s most appropriate use is a new rod on a crank that hasn’t been machined. Say, the oil line plugged and you starved the #1 rod and you want to replace it in the car. After clearing the tube, times saver can be used on the new rod. With a ground crank and a properly babbited rod it shouldn’t be necessary.

Andy

Shouldnd be but... The last short block I got was set too tight. When I started time savering , I found about 75% contact. Pulled one shim & worked it to 98% contact. Timesaver automatically makes the proper clearance. Shouldnt need any readjustment for a long time.